"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...



How about this: "I own a Hummer just because I can." Does that strike you
as a good idea, since this country really does need to lower its demand
for oil? Or, is this not your country?


I have to admit, a Hummer is where I draw the line. I support everyone's
freedom of choice to buy what excites them, but for the life of me I don't
understand the fascination with a 1500 GM pickup truck chassis and a
military, "Terminator" sheet metal body. Reminds me of those toys the kids
play with --- "Transformers" or something like that .... the ones that you
pull on the doors or whatever and it turns into a Robot.

RCE

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"RCE" wrote in message
...

" JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT comREMOVETHIS wrote in message
. ..

"RCE" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...


Look around you, Jimmy. There is absolutely, positively no way in hell
that the enormous increase in truck ownership over the past 30 years
is due to actual need.

-Most don't even have a hitch on them. They tow nothing.

-There've been surveys indicating that the average SUV owner carries
1-2 passengers most of the time, and never more than 4.

-We have not seen a 10-fold increase in the number of construction
workers and trades people. Furthermore, I have housing developments in
progress near me. I see more of the workers arriving in cars, not
trucks. You don't need a truck to haul 2 hammers, a tool belt, and a
cordless drill. They're smart enough to figure this out, and
apparently, they see no need to drive a pickup because someone else
does. So much for "construction sites", as you mentioned. Too bad
soccer moms can't figure this out.

You keep coming back to people who actually need them. Do you know
what the typical female truck buyer gives as a reason?


I do. .... (this is really getting comical) ... maybe not "typical"
.... but..

Mrs.E used to have a Lincoln Navigator. She liked it because it had
some room for her stuff, grandkids and the fact that she felt "safe" in
such a large vehicle.

This spring she traded it in and got one of those new Lincoln pickup
trucks (I forget what you call them). It looks just like a Navigator
from the front, but with a pickup bed in the back. (It's basically a
dolled up Ford F-150)

She loves this now, because it still seats 5 people, but she can easily
haul around her horse saddles, bales of hay, shopping conquests, boat
stuff, flowers, pots, trees and other bulky, large items that she used
to have to wait for me to pick up for her.

RCE




But she is a WOMAN and according to Doug WOMEN do not need trucks, only
MEN do. She is nothing more than a soccer MOM riding around in a MAN's
truck. Doug has evidence to prove it.

Now kindly tell Mrs. E. that Doug Kanter would like her to sell her
truck as, being a woman, she obviously does she *need* one. ;-)


I am afraid it will only serve to support Doug's position. Ford
obviously targeted the Lincoln pickup towards women, IMO.

RCE


There have been ads from several manufacturers which, instead of the macho
music and guys driving through rocky streams, there's a mom gently putting
seat belts on the kiddies la la la. They're still pitching the safety
concept. There was one from Ford which showed a lady driving an Explorer
on an unplowed highway it what looked like 3 feet of snow. THAT is what I
meant. Neither type of commercial conveys an accurate message, really.


It's not unique to Detroit. I like the one for a Saab or Volvo or Audi or
whatever it was (see how effective the ad was?) that shows the car driving
up a ski jump.

RCE

"RCE" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"RCE" wrote in message
...

" JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT comREMOVETHIS wrote in message
. ..

"RCE" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...


Look around you, Jimmy. There is absolutely, positively no way in
hell that the enormous increase in truck ownership over the past 30
years is due to actual need.

-Most don't even have a hitch on them. They tow nothing.

-There've been surveys indicating that the average SUV owner carries
1-2 passengers most of the time, and never more than 4.

-We have not seen a 10-fold increase in the number of construction
workers and trades people. Furthermore, I have housing developments
in progress near me. I see more of the workers arriving in cars, not
trucks. You don't need a truck to haul 2 hammers, a tool belt, and a
cordless drill. They're smart enough to figure this out, and
apparently, they see no need to drive a pickup because someone else
does. So much for "construction sites", as you mentioned. Too bad
soccer moms can't figure this out.

You keep coming back to people who actually need them. Do you know
what the typical female truck buyer gives as a reason?


I do. .... (this is really getting comical) ... maybe not "typical"
.... but..

Mrs.E used to have a Lincoln Navigator. She liked it because it had
some room for her stuff, grandkids and the fact that she felt "safe"
in such a large vehicle.

This spring she traded it in and got one of those new Lincoln pickup
trucks (I forget what you call them). It looks just like a Navigator
from the front, but with a pickup bed in the back. (It's basically a
dolled up Ford F-150)

She loves this now, because it still seats 5 people, but she can
easily haul around her horse saddles, bales of hay, shopping
conquests, boat stuff, flowers, pots, trees and other bulky, large
items that she used to have to wait for me to pick up for her.

RCE




But she is a WOMAN and according to Doug WOMEN do not need trucks, only
MEN do. She is nothing more than a soccer MOM riding around in a
MAN's truck. Doug has evidence to prove it.

Now kindly tell Mrs. E. that Doug Kanter would like her to sell her
truck as, being a woman, she obviously does she *need* one. ;-)


I am afraid it will only serve to support Doug's position. Ford
obviously targeted the Lincoln pickup towards women, IMO.

RCE


There have been ads from several manufacturers which, instead of the
macho music and guys driving through rocky streams, there's a mom gently
putting seat belts on the kiddies la la la. They're still pitching the
safety concept. There was one from Ford which showed a lady driving an
Explorer on an unplowed highway it what looked like 3 feet of snow. THAT
is what I meant. Neither type of commercial conveys an accurate message,
really.


It's not unique to Detroit. I like the one for a Saab or Volvo or Audi or
whatever it was (see how effective the ad was?) that shows the car
driving up a ski jump.

RCE


Right. Well, what percentage of male SUV owners use them to ford streams?
:-) And, who's going to venture out on an unplowed road with 3 feet of
snow, other than plow drivers? But, people eat that up.

RCE wrote:
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...



How about this: "I own a Hummer just because I can." Does that strike you
as a good idea, since this country really does need to lower its demand
for oil? Or, is this not your country?


I have to admit, a Hummer is where I draw the line. I support everyone's
freedom of choice to buy what excites them, but for the life of me I don't
understand the fascination with a 1500 GM pickup truck chassis and a
military, "Terminator" sheet metal body. Reminds me of those toys the kids
play with --- "Transformers" or something like that .... the ones that you
pull on the doors or whatever and it turns into a Robot.

RCE

I agree, aside from being butt ugly, they are too wide and
unmaneuverable for todays parking lots and streets. I watched some fool
with his penis, I mean Hummer trying to park at an office complex. He
was there when I got there, I parked, got my briefcase out of the back,
while talking on my cell phone, and he was still parking when I went in!

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Bryan" wrote in message
. com...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Bryan" wrote in message
news
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Bryan" wrote in message
. net...

"tillius" wrote in message
oups.com...

JohnH wrote:
On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 19:01:23 -0400, Harry Krause

wrote more political bull**** which was deleted:

You're trying, Harry. Hopefully enough folks will realize just what
you're
trying to do.
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

Don't worry. Enough folks already know what Harry and the rest of
you
socialist Demoncraps are trying to do.

Till


Till,
I've been a republican, a democrat, a libertarian, and an
independent. I vote the issue and the man, not the party. Please
leave the name calling for another group.


"I'm a WAR president!"


LOL!
Thanks, you're sending me to the airport with a smile on my face.


I didn't want to call him any more names tonight. So, I thought I'd just
remind you in an indirect way that your president was a
lete ------- -----.


Doug,
I'm back from the airport, the kids are tucked in and sleeping like logs,
and I'm confused. When did he become MY president? Is what we have
here, a failure to communicate?

Did you vote for him?


Does not matter who you or anyone else voted for. You got Bush as your
President, if you are a USA citizen!

On 24 Apr 2006 15:45:22 -0700, "basskisser" wrote:


RCE wrote:
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...



How about this: "I own a Hummer just because I can." Does that strike you
as a good idea, since this country really does need to lower its demand
for oil? Or, is this not your country?


I have to admit, a Hummer is where I draw the line. I support everyone's
freedom of choice to buy what excites them, but for the life of me I don't
understand the fascination with a 1500 GM pickup truck chassis and a
military, "Terminator" sheet metal body. Reminds me of those toys the kids
play with --- "Transformers" or something like that .... the ones that you
pull on the doors or whatever and it turns into a Robot.

RCE

I agree, aside from being butt ugly, they are too wide and
unmaneuverable for todays parking lots and streets. I watched some fool
with his penis, I mean Hummer trying to park at an office complex. He
was there when I got there, I parked, got my briefcase out of the back,
while talking on my cell phone, and he was still parking when I went in!

Yeah, but weren't all the girls standing around his Hummer, just waiting
for him to get out so they could ogle his manliness?
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

"While the oil companies deny any manipulation, public confidence was eroded
at the recent report that exiting Exxon Mobil executive Lee Raymond was
getting a 400 million dollar retirement package."

On 25 Apr 2006 06:26:17 -0700, "basskisser" wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On 24 Apr 2006 15:45:22 -0700, "basskisser" wrote:


RCE wrote:
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...



How about this: "I own a Hummer just because I can." Does that strike you
as a good idea, since this country really does need to lower its demand
for oil? Or, is this not your country?


I have to admit, a Hummer is where I draw the line. I support everyone's
freedom of choice to buy what excites them, but for the life of me I don't
understand the fascination with a 1500 GM pickup truck chassis and a
military, "Terminator" sheet metal body. Reminds me of those toys the kids
play with --- "Transformers" or something like that .... the ones that you
pull on the doors or whatever and it turns into a Robot.

RCE

I agree, aside from being butt ugly, they are too wide and
unmaneuverable for todays parking lots and streets. I watched some fool
with his penis, I mean Hummer trying to park at an office complex. He
was there when I got there, I parked, got my briefcase out of the back,
while talking on my cell phone, and he was still parking when I went in!

Yeah, but weren't all the girls standing around his Hummer, just waiting
for him to get out so they could ogle his manliness?
--
'Til next time,

John H


Uh, yeah...sure..... He probably doesn't have much in the pants to
ogle....hence the Hummer!

Amen!
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

On Tue, 25 Apr 2006 13:41:09 GMT, Ignatius Thistlewhite
wrote:

You wrote:

"While the oil companies deny any manipulation, public confidence was
eroded at the recent report that exiting Exxon Mobil executive Lee
Raymond was getting a 400 million dollar retirement package."

If you do not like the fact that ExxonMobil used part of its 9 cents per
gallon profit to compensate a retiring executive, patronize another
supplier of the company's products.

If you do not like the fact that government taxes account for 40 cents per
gallon, well, there's nothing you can do about that.

From where comes the 9 cents a gallon figure and the 49 cents a gallon
figure?
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

Doug Kanter wrote:

I drive a 6-cylinder Totota pickup, about 30 miles per week. My ex drives a
Subaru 4-cylinder.

I drive a Ford Excursion V10 (gas). When I'm driving it, I think of
Douglas Kanter, and all the fuel he is saving with his vehicles so I can
have enough fuel for my huge vehicle.

Tick tock, tick tock...